“I will never accept the charge; I will not accept what I did not do. I understand, they have lost a son, but I have lost my life of 23 years for what I have not done. “

The trial of Artur Mkrtchyan, a life-sentenced convict, is continuing at the Shengavit Court of General
Jurisdiction of Yerevan.

On August 1,
2018, the court, under the presidency of Judge Artush Gabrielyan, made an
unprecedented ruling on the case of Arthur Mkrtchyan, recognizing the decision
of the Penitentiary Service Placement Commission (to refuse to change the life sentence of
the convict by removing him from closed regime to
semi-closed one) as unlawful.

The court had ordered the above service to
restore the rights of Arthur Mkrtchyan, but as Arthur stated in court, it was
only on paper and there was no substantial change.

On November 15, prosecutor Zakaryan filed a
petition to the court asking for the victims’ successors to declare their
positions in court on Arthur’s conditional release.

Thus, for two hearings, the court heard the
victim’s successors.

Today Artashes Mkhitaryan and Zhenya Harutyunyan,
whose sons were killed 23 years ago, appeared in court.

The late serviceman Emil Matevosyan’s mother
Zhenya Harutyunyan, before taking a stand, declared: “If he does not tell
the truth, I’m against his freedom,” repeating that she was against it
only because Arthur knew the truth but was covering it up.

“I went to jail, begged him to tell the truth
who killed them. My son was asleep when he was killed,” Zhenya Harutyunyan said
indignantly.

Asked by Forrights if she were sure that her son
was killed by Arthur, Mrs. Zhenya’s answered with tears in her eyes: “Five
people have died, shots have been fired from three different weapons. I am not
sure [if Artur was the killer], but I think he has killed at least one of them.
Let him say the truth,” she said.

The next victim’s representative also stood out
with emotional background and outraged statements: “If my son is not
there, let him not be too,” Artashes Mkhitaryan said, noting that he was
against Arthur’s conditional release.

“Why should I be sentenced to life in my
mourning, but he be released on parole,” he said, followed by offensive
remarks about Arthur. As the atmosphere in the courtroom heated up, the
presiding judge used a sanction against the victim’s successor.

Arthur Mkrtchyan responded to the opinions of the
victim’s successor “If in doubt, you should be interested in reopening the
case. I say open the case! How do I open it in the prison? Help me, let’s apply
to open it,” Arthur said to the victim’s successors, stressing:

“I will never accept the charge; I will never
admit what I did not do,” he said, adding, “I understand they have
lost a son, but I have lost my life of 23 years. I understand, I suffer too
from living in the prison every day.”

The prosecutor in the case expressed his position:
“I find it premature to consider Arthur’s conditional release, so this
appeal is subject to rejection,” he said, noting that Arthur had 9
penalties over 23 years, no work, no incentives, and no acceptance of his
guilt.

Referring to the penalties cited by the
prosecutor, the prisoner said that it was four years since his conditional
release was being examined, and in those four years there was always a
reference to the fact that he had 9 penalties:

“Nine penalties have not been increased in
the past four years, and if 50 years pass, 50 years later they will still refer
to the same 9 penalties,” Arthur said. As for work, he said he never
avoided work, even if it was unpaid. “I was ready and have worked whenever
there was work.”

Artur Mkrtchyan had received 9 penalties during
the 23 years of imprisonment, the last one happened in 2013 for keeping a
cellphone. All penalties have been paid. It should be noted that Mkrtchyan
received most of the 9 penalties not because of his conduct, but because he has
kept phones.

Attorney Khanum Mkrtchain referred to the
prosecutor’s statement about work, asking: “Is there any evidence in the
case that Arthur Mkrtchyan was offered a job and he has rejected it?” The
prosecutor did not respond.

The lawyer also referred to the redress of
penalties with a civil petition, noting that all penalties were paid, so this
statement of the prosecutor is invalid.

Returning from the consultation room, the court
issued a decision rejecting the appeal. It should also be noted that none of
the life prisoners has been released on parole so far.

It should be reminded that Arthur Mkrtyan was
accused of killing five of his colleagues in 1996, but he has not accepted the
charge.

The victim’s successor Rafik Martoyan, the father
of the serviceman Vardan Martoyan, appeared in court at the previous hearing.
His son was killed that tragic day 23 years ago.

The court asked the victim’s representative whether Artur
Mkrtchyan had paid his civil penalty, and whether he has no claim, to which
Rafik Martoyan responded that he had paid: “What debt and claim should I
have? I have none.”

“My baby is no more, and this man is an innocent man, he
has been in prison for 23 years. I have no complaints,” he said. “Do you
accept that Arthur is not the one who killed your son?” the judge
clarified the question. “Arthur is not the killer,” Martoyan stated
once again. After a brief question and answer session, Artur Mkrtchyan said: “I
truly do not know who the killer is.”

“It is 23 years since my child is killed. What is there I can
want from him [from Artur]? Let’s say, he remains in prison two more years: how
do I benefit from it?” said the father of the murdered soldier to the court and
then, turning to Artur, he said: “I wish, god willing, you get freed.”